Don’t bother me with details dammit!

Shock n' Awe! This is more fun than those boring old weapons inspections!

Bush Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has a book to sell, so he’s left his hidey-hole to appear on the teevee again and tell us all about the Iraq War.
The Washington Post Fact Checker took issue with this exchange last week on Good Morning America:

George Stephanopoulos: “But you had inspectors in the country [Iraq]. Why was it necessary to invade–”
Former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld: Saddam Hussein “had thrown them out about the second or third or fourth time.”

Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the timeline as we marched into Iraq knows that Mr. Rumsfeld is lying here. (I could say ‘obfuscating’ or ‘fabricating’ or ‘dissembling’ – I believe these are the words our media prefer, ‘lying’ being so, well, so succinct. So it’s just not done my dear – unless of course you’re Rep. Joe Wilson and then you can call  the President of the United States a liar in front of the whole world.)

Or maybe the old fellow really doesn’t know what happened in that war he led.

From the Fact Checker:

2002-2003 inspections

The departure of the inspectors in 2003 is much more clear-cut: They wanted to keep looking for weapons of mass destruction and reported that Iraq was showing increasing cooperation. But the Bush administration clearly had its own timetable for military action.

From November 2002 through February 2003, the inspection teams conducted more than 760 inspections of 500 sites. Hans Blix, who headed what had been renamed UNMOVIC, reported there was no evidence of active chemical or biological weapons programs or stockpiles.

The IAEA reported no evidence of any kind of reconstituted nuclear weapons program. In a March 2003 appearance before the Security Council, then-IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei (now active in the Egyptian protests) went even further, directly disputing key pieces of evidence that the American administration had touted in its case for war.

Blix, in his memoir “Disarming Iraq,” notes that in early March he began getting warnings from senior U.S. and British officials about the safety of the inspectors. Then the company that supplied helicopters for the teams withdrew its equipment from Iraq.

The inspections ended quickly. On March 17, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan announced the inspectors would be withdrawn. A day later, they left the country. On March 19, the U.S.-led invasion began, without explicit authority from the Security Council. (The Arms Control Association has another timeline, while the Congressional Research Service has an excellent report on the inspections.)

No weapons of mass destruction were ever found in Iraq.

12 responses to “Don’t bother me with details dammit!

  1. Rummy was a chump…..

    There is no other thing to say….

    He cared less for the military…
    Did the war on the cheap…
    Looked down his nose at career soliders….
    And screwed over Powell and Rice with his’juice’ VP Cheney…

    Like

  2. The preferred media word for ‘murderous fucking liar’ is ‘disingenuous’.

    Like

  3. The more I think about it, the more I’m going to go with he is now and was then an old man with so much ego that things like wars and soldiers were simply details along his path to some imagined personal glory – and he had staff, you know, to deal with that stuff.

    Bush wanted to get rid of him two years before Rumsfeld resigned, but Cheney wouldn’t let him.

    Of course, none of that matters any more cuz Obama is a Muslim Kenyan commie.

    Like

  4. I wonder if Joe Wilson would have told Rumsfeld “You lie!” before storming out of the room like a spoiled 8 year old.

    Or maybe that’s reserved for secret Moooslim Kenyans stating easily researched factual information.

    Like

  5. alvin alcibiades

    A chump? No, Rumsfield is not a chump.

    He is a war criminal. Nothing more, nothing less.

    The United States cannot even pretend to be anything except an outlaw nation until the responsible members of the Bush Administration are brought to trial for their crimes.

    And by not repudiating his predecessor–indeed by continuing many of the illegal policies–Obama has made himself complicit as well. This is a sad time to be an American.

    Like

  6. Mr. Rumsfeld never let facts get in the way of his nor president Cheney’s decisions. Why start now, when those facts are long since beyond (if they ever were within) the purview of the majority of the US public’s 3-minute attention span.

    Not to dismiss the tens of (hundreds of?) thousands of right thinking Americans who marched in opposition to the war, but who you only were allowed minimizing glimpses of, if at all, on corporate US TV.

    Thanks to representative (as opposed to direct) democracy which Americans blindly continue to tolerate, indeed celebrate, not to mention fetishize, those who protested the war were as ignored by their government as they were by the US media.

    Exactly how the founding fathers (where were the mothers when you needed ’em?) designed it: The public gets to vote from an alternating (often permanent i.e. R. Kennedy, S. Thurmond) cast of millionaires who represent the interests of wealth and power or representatives who eventually get bought (by campaign contributions) to do the bidding not of their electorate but of the interests of wealth and power (i.e. B. Obama).

    Why is there never any talk about direct democracy (where the public -not the representatives- vote directly on the issues) in the halls of Congress? Why is there never any talk about the extreme likelihood bordering on certainty of the non-existence of a god in churches, synagogues or mosques? Those who ply their trade in these institutions don’t want to render those institutions, and thus themselves, obsolete.

    Like

    • Hey Holey Cow, welcome!

      You said: “Not to dismiss the tens of (hundreds of?) thousands of right thinking Americans who marched in opposition to the war, but who you only were allowed minimizing glimpses of, if at all, on corporate US TV.”

      EXACTLY RIGHT. I recently found out that more people marched in opposition to the Iraq War than did over Vietnam – and nary a whisper in the media. Don’t know if you rememeber but Phil Donahue had just begun a show on MSNBC (this was before they took up the FOX model) and he started in ’02 questioning all the Iraq war talk – they yanked him right off the air and sent him away. Of course, GE owned the network and there were weapons to be sold dontcha’ know!

      We are in the corporate state already.

      Like

  7. Yep, the Donahue yanking is the most spectacularly flagrant exhibit ever of what happens if you don’t follow the manufacturing consent playbook. Not even Chomsky could have improved on it by making something up.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s